The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning

[mikesw]

You have not shown any evidence of a "pre-existent one who became flesh" using Scripture. I have asked you at least a dozen times to refer to the Old Testament where said pre-existent one pre-existed and/or where anyone else outside of John 1 supports your interpretation. None of that exists, though, as we have seen. So you are not sharing Scripture, you are sharing a random man's pet religion and trying to pass it off as Scripture. The wall you are up against is that there are people here who will not enable you add to nor take away from the Bible like you seem to used to have been doing.

I'm sure you will be asking when rocks praised God in the OT. The relevant interactions of two who are called Yahweh have been presented as a viable basis for showing the Word as eternally existing. But you just wave the passages off as if they were flies in your face that greatly annoyed you. Your ridiculous questions about finding Jesus walking around in the OT with that name simply degrades your standing in the discussions.

 

[Runningman]

I'm sure you will be asking when rocks praised God in the OT. The relevant interactions of two who are called Yahweh have been presented as a viable basis for showing the Word as eternally existing. But you just wave the passages off as if they were flies in your face that greatly annoyed you. Your ridiculous questions about finding Jesus walking around in the OT with that name simply degrades your standing in the discussions.

It seems since you can't find a pre-existent "word" who later became flesh in the Bible, you have now proposed a new idol: rocks. That seems to be the reoccurring theme in your talking points; every one one of them ends with your god be a creation, i.e., rocks, flesh, angels, talking donkeys, 3 men, etc.

Paul condemned your interpretation explicitly. I suppose you still won't see it as perhaps it is too literal for you. I am sure you will find a new interpretation or translation that itches your ears.

Romans 1
25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is forever worthy of praise! Amen.

 

[mikesw]

It seems since you can't find a pre-existent "word" who later became flesh in the Bible, you have now proposed a new idol: rocks. That seems to be the reoccurring theme in your talking points; every one one of them ends with your god be a creation, i.e., rocks, flesh, angels, talking donkeys, 3 men, etc.

Paul condemned your interpretation explicitly. I suppose you still won't see it as perhaps it is too literal for you. I am sure you will find a new interpretation or translation that itches your ears.

Romans 1
25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is forever worthy of praise! Amen.

Really? You're arguments are getting less persuasive every day.

so now you call Jesus a creature and make a mere creature the center of your life. that is indeed idolatry if Jesus were mere human.

Edited after diserner's thumbs up
You really veer far from scripture when you reject that the Rock was Christ. The wholesale rejection of the idea shows an extreme bias against the preexistence shown in scripture. Christians tend to favor the real presence of Christ among the Israel people in the wilderness. The unitarian reject everything without realizing their rejection of Christ.

I guess RM also denies that water came from the Rock, since that is impossible to his way of thinking. But with water coming from the Rock, why can he not recognize God's presence there?

 

[Doug Brents]

Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:5-9; and Isaiah 6:6-8 - In each we have the singular God/LORD speaking to someone else----clearly to persons other than himself.

That is your opinion. But it does not fit with the character or power of God. There is not a single other being in existence who had the image of God before He made man. So there was no other being to whom He could have said, "Let US make man in OUR image." No one else to be part of "us" or "our", except for Jesus and the Holy Spirit who are part of the same God as the Father.

In two of the 'us' references Gen. 3:22 and Isaiah 6:6-8 - cherubim and seraphim are present and it's highly likely that God is speaking to them. It wouldn't be beyond impossible for Gen. 1:26 and Gen. 11:5-9 to also be God speaking to his heavenly host, to the angelic beings.

Angels and angelic beings are not made in God's image. So God could not be speaking to them.

Four verses in all of scripture referencing plural pronouns isn't really significant among the many (approximately 25,000) usages of the singular verbs, adjectives, and pronouns used in reference to God.

It is significant when it is in Scripture. Each and every word in Scripture is significant.

 

[amazing grace]

That is your opinion. But it does not fit with the character or power of God. There is not a single other being in existence who had the image of God before He made man. So there was no other being to whom He could have said, "Let US make man in OUR image." No one else to be part of "us" or "our", except for Jesus and the Holy Spirit who are part of the same God as the Father.

Angels and angelic beings are not made in God's image. So God could not be speaking to them.

It is significant when it is in Scripture. Each and every word in Scripture is significant.

What is the image of God? God is Spirit (John 4:24)
What are angels? spiritual beings
The angels were there: “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.
Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? [Job 38:4-7]

I agree that each and every word in scripture is significant and there are NO scriptures stating that God is a Triune being. NO scripture that says God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. BUT there are plenty of scripture describing God as a single person being God alone - no other besides him - To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD (Yahweh) is God; there is no other besides him. [Deut. 4:35]; I am the LORD (Yahweh), and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me, [Isa. 45:5] among the many!

 

[Doug Brents]

What is the image of God? God is Spirit (John 4:24)
What are angels? spiritual beings

That's a good question.
God is indeed Spirit. But that is not the image of God because angels are spirits as well and they are not made in the image of God. Satan is not in the image of God.

The angels were there: “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.
Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? [Job 38:4-7]

That's true, they were. But they could not have been to whom God was speaking. They did not participate in Creation (they lacked the power), nor are they made in God's image so they lack the prerequisite for being part of "us" and "our".

I agree that each and every word in scripture is significant and there are NO scriptures stating that God is a Triune being.

There are indeed. Matt 28:19 gives the same authority to each of the three named: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
And each of the three is called God, or given the power, respect, authority, and glory of God in different places in Scripture.

NO scripture that says God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Again, you are ignoring much of Scripture if you beleive this statement.

BUT there are plenty of scripture describing God as a single person being God alone - no other besides him - To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD (Yahweh) is God; there is no other besides him. [Deut. 4:35]; I am the LORD (Yahweh), and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me, [Isa. 45:5] among the many!

There are indeed many passages of Scripture that tell us that God is One, united in His power, authority, glory, majesty, etc. But since you agree that EVERY SINGLE WORD of Scripture is significant, you cannot ignore the passages where God describes Himself in the plural, or the passages that say that Jesus is God, or the passages that say the Holy Spirit is God, or the passages that link the three as the ONE God.

 

[Runningman]

Really? You're arguments are getting less persuasive every day.

so now you call Jesus a creature and make a mere creature the center of your life. that is indeed idolatry if Jesus were mere human.

Edited after diserner's thumbs up
You really veer far from scripture when you reject that the Rock was Christ. The wholesale rejection of the idea shows an extreme bias against the preexistence shown in scripture. Christians tend to favor the real presence of Christ among the Israel people in the wilderness. The unitarian reject everything without realizing their rejection of Christ.

I guess RM also denies that water came from the Rock, since that is impossible to his way of thinking. But with water coming from the Rock, why can he not recognize God's presence there?

I believe the best way to defang and declaw your venomous talking points against Scripture is to just show you where the Bible explicitly identifies Jesus/The Son/The Word/etc as a creation and/or of the creation. Talk less, listen more, Mike.

Colossians 1
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Revelation 3
14And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

 

[Doug Brents]

I believe the best way to defang and declaw your venomous talking points against Scripture is to just show you where the Bible explicitly identifies Jesus/The Son/The Word/etc as a creation and/or of the creation. Talk less, listen more, Mike.

Colossians 1
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Jesus was the first born of the dead. And He is the source of Creation (John 1:3).

Revelation 3
14And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Rev 3:14 does not say, the "beginning", the word ἀρχὴ (archē) means "source", "originator". Jesus is the source of all creation.

 

[JesusFan]

Jesus was the first born of the dead. And He is the source of Creation (John 1:3).

Rev 3:14 does not say, the "beginning", the word ἀρχὴ (archē) means "source", "originator". Jesus is the source of all creation.

Word image refers to an exact representation

 

[amazing grace]

That's a good question.
God is indeed Spirit. But that is not the image of God because angels are spirits as well and they are not made in the image of God. Satan is not in the image of God.

That's true, they were. But they could not have been to whom God was speaking. They did not participate in Creation (they lacked the power), nor are they made in God's image so they lack the prerequisite for being part of "us" and "our".

Just what do you consider the 'image of God' to be in relation to Genesis 1:26?
Satan was a top ranking angel until he fell but that's not what is in question here.
What is in question is: Was God speaking with the other two persons, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit as a Triune God OR
was God speaking with his angels? My choice would be that Almighty God was not talking to himself but with his other created beings which were there with him watching as he created.
I agree that the angels did not participate in creating man nor did anyone else for that matter - Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.---- God alone did the creating.

There are indeed. Matt 28:19 gives the same authority to each of the three named: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
And each of the three is called God, or given the power, respect, authority, and glory of God in different places in Scripture.

Again, you are ignoring much of Scripture if you beleive this statement.

So linking Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together in one verse is proof of a Triune God, a Trinity? Because it sure doesn't say that God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I still see NO plain and clear scripture stating that God is a Triune being nor ANY scripture that says God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

BUT we do have scripture which says the Father is the only true God and that Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son --- the one sent by God born of a woman, and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God or evidence of the new birth, being born again of the Spirit. Because I understand scripture from a Unitarian point of view doesn't mean that I ignore scripture.

Is being called by the title 'God' equivalent to being God, aka Almighty God, aka the Most High God?

There are indeed many passages of Scripture that tell us that God is One, united in His power, authority, glory, majesty, etc. But since you agree that EVERY SINGLE WORD of Scripture is significant, you cannot ignore the passages where God describes Himself in the plural, or the passages that say that Jesus is God, or the passages that say the Holy Spirit is God, or the passages that link the three as the ONE God.

I'm glad you agree that there are many passages that tell us that God is ONE ..... BUT NOT the rest of your sentence.

I haven't ignored the four passages of scripture which use plural pronouns in relation to God speaking to someone other than himself... I have addressed said passages. There are quite a few scholars who agree with the point that God is speaking with his angels and then there are quite a few scholars who associate the plural pronouns as 'plural of majesty'. This is when a singular monarch (king, queen) or high authority using "we" or "us" to represent their power, often called the 'royal we'. Either way, there are plausible explanations in which to understand the plural usage of pronouns without having to contradict the clear and plain text of scripture that declare God to be one.

 

[Doug Brents]

Just what do you consider the 'image of God' to be in relation to Genesis 1:26?
Satan was a top ranking angel until he fell but that's not what is in question here.
What is in question is: Was God speaking with the other two persons, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit as a Triune God OR
was God speaking with his angels? My choice would be that Almighty God was not talking to himself but with his other created beings which were there with him watching as he created.
I agree that the angels did not participate in creating man nor did anyone else for that matter - Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.---- God alone did the creating.

Yes, God alone did the Creating: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One God with three parts. If God was talking to the angels, then He was inviting them to participate in the creation, and stating that they were also made in His image. But they were not. I cannot tell you what the image of God is (other than to say that it is only God and mankind), but I can tell you what it is not. It is not angels; it is not the heavenly host; it is not the world around us.

So linking Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together in one verse is proof of a Triune God, a Trinity? Because it sure doesn't say that God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I still see NO plain and clear scripture stating that God is a Triune being nor ANY scripture that says God consists of 3 persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

God does not share His glory. Yet Jesus had the glory of God before He emptied Himself and became a man.
Jesus is the Logos of God. And the Logos of God was God before Creation, and was responsible for the creation of everything that was made (ie. everything other than God).
The Holy Spirit is God, and is the gift of God to all those who are in Christ, living in the Temple that is our bodies, guiding, teaching, and supporting us through our tribulation.
We have already share the Scripture references for all these Truths. There are three that are One God according to Scripture.

BUT we do have scripture which says the Father is the only true God and that Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son --- the one sent by God born of a woman, and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God or evidence of the new birth, being born again of the Spirit. Because I understand scripture from a Unitarian point of view doesn't mean that I ignore scripture.

Sure it does. Scripture cannot be more clear than to say that the Logos was God, and the Logos put on flesh and dwelt on Earth as a man known as Jesus of Nazareth. To say that Jesus is not God is to either call that passage (John 1) a lie, or to ignore it completely.

Is being called by the title 'God' equivalent to being God, aka Almighty God, aka the Most High God?

If it is truth, then yes. If it is not truth, then it is blasphemy.

I'm glad you agree that there are many passages that tell us that God is ONE ..... BUT NOT the rest of your sentence.

Then you disagree with Scripture.

I haven't ignored the four passages of scripture which use plural pronouns in relation to God speaking to someone other than himself... I have addressed said passages. There are quite a few scholars who agree with the point that God is speaking with his angels and then there are quite a few scholars who associate the plural pronouns as 'plural of majesty'. This is when a singular monarch (king, queen) or high authority using "we" or "us" to represent their power, often called the 'royal we'. Either way, there are plausible explanations in which to understand the plural usage of pronouns without having to contradict the clear and plain text of scripture that declare God to be one.

It does not contradict Scripture to say that the three are one. Man and wife are one. The Church and Jesus will become one at the wedding feast during the thousand years of celebration after the end of the world at the Second Coming (He as the groom and the Church collectively as the bride). The Church is one, even though there are thousands (millions? billions?) of us over the past 2000 years, not to mention the 4000 years before that).